Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 105 OR 662 - State v. Walters

State v. Walters’s Empirical Analysis

1922

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
3
states following
March 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably Brown v. State (1959), Veney v. State (1968)

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

1601922193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Moore v. United States · State v. Reed · State v. Start · Stone v. State · Dunn v. State

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The killing would not have occurred if the robberies had not been committed. The robberies furnished the motive for the killing.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““As a general rule the test as to whether a witness is an accomplice is whether he himself could be indicted and punished for the crime for which the accused is being tried. If he could be so tried and punished, then he is an accomplice; if he could not, then he is not an accomplice: State v. Turnbow, 99 Or 270, 280 ( 193 Pac. 485 , 195 Pac. 569 ); Stone v. State, 118 Ga. 705 ( 45 S. E. 630 , 98 Am. St. Rep. 145 ); 1 R. C. L. 157.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Tillman was an accomplice in the commission of the three robberies; but the record does not disclose a word of evidence having the slightest tendency to show that he participated in or was connected with the homicide. Tillman was not an accomplice in the killing of Palmer, and therefore the trial judge properly omitted to instruct the jury about viewing the testimony of an accomplice with distrust.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.